If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

resident Donald Trump still insists he'll get Mexico to pay the $18 billion proposed cost for his "big and beautiful wall" along the U.S. southern border by renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement in favor of the United States, despite resistance from Mexico and, apparently, his own chief of staff.

Trump reiterated his declaration Thursday on Twitter, after The Washington Post reported that Chief of Staff John Kelly said Trump’s immigration policies during the campaign were “uninformed" and that Mexico will never pay for the wall.
"The Wall will be paid for, directly or indirectly, or through longer term reimbursement, by Mexico, which has a ridiculous $71 billion dollar trade surplus with the U.S. The $20 billion dollar Wall is “peanuts” compared to what Mexico makes from the U.S. NAFTA is a bad joke!" Trump tweeted.

That early morning post on Thursday doubled down on Trump's comments last week that Mexico "will pay" for the wall "indirectly through NAFTA, okay?"

Through NAFTA? So is Canada going to pay for half???

Economists, however, dispute Trump’s claim that a better deal will yield money directly from the Mexican government to pay for the wall. Collecting higher tariffs on imports—if that’s Trump’s strategy—will only drive up the cost of goods and make production more expensive. Consumers and businesses, not the Mexican government, will pay more, Joshua Meltzer, a senior fellow for Global Economy and Development at The Brookings Institute, told Newsweek.

"There’s no sort of obvious relationship where this is an indirect way of Mexico paying for the wall through renegotiating NAFTA," Meltzer said.

The Republicans have the President, the House and the Senate yet cannot agree to pass a bill to prevent the shutdown. Last minute votes, three Republicans voted against it including Lindsey Graham have killed it.

All this on the eve of Trump's first year. Looks like Trump won't be going to his $100,000 a plate party in Mar a Lago.

When the government shuts down, the IRS shuts down and all those staff working on the implementation of the Yuge Tax Bill will stop work.

Hey Trump! Getting tired of winning???? You are the best deal maker ever. You just bankrupted the country by not getting a budget passed. But you are an experienced businessman who has gone bankrupt many times before. Who will bail you out this time? Maybe call Russia.

Sad...

Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 19-01-2018 at 08:47 PM.

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

The stupid thing about it is that he's doing it all out of spite for having his racist rant exposed by both Democrats and Republicans. Protection for the DREAMers is popular among voters of both parties but not his base so he can't bring himself to do something that the majority of Americans are in favour of.

The Republicans also put children's healthcare into the bill as a way to force the Democrats to vote on it and then wanted to shelve the dreamers to some late date but paas the bill that includes funding for the wall. Since no one trusts Trump to keep his word, the Democrats refused to sell out.

This is clearly on Trump because he is totally inept and a rotten deal maker when he cannot bully and bluster his demands on experienced law makers.

Nobody is buying the Trump ********.

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

The Trump campaign released a new ad spot on Saturday calling Democrats "complicit" in all murders by immigrants in the country illegally, following the opposition of Democratic senators to a short-term spending bill, which resulted in a federal government shutdown on Friday.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

[Adams submitted and signed the Treaty of Tripoli, 1797]
John Adams..

The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
George Washington ...1796

The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries.

[Letter objecting to the use of government land for churches, 1803]
James Madison..

Although orthodox Christians participated at every stage of the new republic, Deism influenced a majority of the Founders. The movement opposed barriers to moral improvement and to social justice. It stood for rational inquiry, for skepticism about dogma and mystery, and for religious toleration. Many of its adherents advocated universal education, freedom of the press, and separation of church and state. If the nation owes much to the Judeo-Christian tradition, it is also indebted to Deism, a movement of reason and equality that influenced the Founding Fathers to embrace liberal political ideals remarkable for their time.
David L. Holmes

And Republicans are complicit in every murder committed with firearms championed by the NRA. By body count alone, the Republicans are guilty of many, many more murders then.

I don’t think so. Regarding the accusations against the Democrats or the Republicans. Just more BS.

A better case can be made against the Republicans. What have they done in the aftermath of the Las Vegas shooting, other than offering thoughts and prayers and shrugging their shoulders over bump stocks?

And Republicans are complicit in every murder committed with firearms championed by the NRA. By body count alone, the Republicans are guilty of many, many more murders then.

I don’t think so. Regarding the accusations against the Democrats or the Republicans. Just more BS.

A better case can be made against the Republicans. What have they done in the aftermath of the Las Vegas shooting, other than offering thoughts and prayers and shrugging their shoulders over bump stocks?

The White House released pictures of Trump and the White House staff laughing and smiling as millions of Americans are about be harmed by the Trump Shutdown.Here are the pictures from The White House as provided to PoliticusUSA:Trump tries to sell more hats, while on the phone:

They just unleashed a crisis of their own making. Now is not the time for laughter.

Notice that in none of the pictures is Trump in a meeting with Congressional leadership to end the shutdown. Donald Trump is “working,” and by working the White House means roaming around, talking on the phone, and laughing it up with staff. Trump is just hanging out and waiting for the shutdown to end. It’s like he isn’t even president.

Never in modern presidential history has an administration tried to release photographic evidence to prove that their president is working during a crisis. However, the Trump administration couldn’t even get their propaganda right as none of the photos show Trump doing anything to resolve the shutdown.

The photos are proof that Trump is enjoying the government shutdown that he caused.

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

They want to ban all abortions to protect the unborn but when they go to school, they get gunned down by some mentally deranged lunatic that is allowed to buy many military grade semiautomatic assault guns and countless rounds of ammunition because he is protected by the complicit NRA & GOP and his 2nd Ammendment Rights.

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

It's a good thing his doctor said that he passed his cognition test because this makes him sound like a lunatic.

The bar is so low that no one noticed Trump’s inept Davos remark about the border wall
Multiple experts struggled to understand what Trump was saying about border wall funding during a Davos interview

President Donald Trump is not known for his eloquence, but at some point his inability to articulate becomes a serious problem.

Take this quote from his recent interview with CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

"But we need a strong border. And to do that you need a wall. And they did agree to a $25 billion wall, of which I'll have a lot of money left over. Because I don't need $25 billion to build a wall. We'll build a great — that's what I do. We'll build a great wall and we'll have a lot of money left over, and we'll spend it on other things."

It sounded to me, upon reading this, that Trump had just suggested he could ask Congress for more money on his infamous US-Mexico border wall than he actually needs, then spend the difference on completely different programs. If that is what he said, then he doesn't understand how the government works — which is not inconceivable, given who we're talking about.

No, Trump and his supporters aren't racists. Really. Honest and for true.

Would they lie to you?

‘Get out of the country!’: Navajo lawmaker harassed by Arizona Trump supporters accusing him of being here ‘illegally’

“Supporters of President Donald Trump singled out dark-skinned lawmakers, legislative staffers and children at the Capitol on Jan. 25 as they protested congressional efforts to pass immigration reform, according to staffers of the Arizona Legislature and two Democratic legislators, AZ Capitol Times reported. “Waving large flags in support of Trump while standing between the House and Senate buildings, the protesters, who were also armed, asked just about anyone who crossed their path if they ‘support illegal immigration.’”

One dark-skinned Arizonian who was asked if he was in the country “illegally” was Rep. Eric Descheenie (D-Chinle).

How Trump and his cronies could make out like bandits on "the big, beautiful wall"

Could Trump’s “big, beautiful wall” be a profit engine — for him?
Trump’s entire career has been mired in corruption. Why should his ludicrous border wall be any different?

"The Texas Tribune and ProPublica published a joint report on Tuesday detailing the legal battle over a kickback scheme that grew out of construction efforts on the Bush-era version of the wall. Hidalgo County, Texas, is suing a man named Godfrey Garza Jr., accusing him of masterminding an elaborate conspiracy to use federal funds to build a border barrier in order to enrich himself and his family at the taxpayer expense.

Garza, who was director of the county’s drainage district, "cajoled company executives to hire a firm owned by his family in exchange for a cut of lucrative construction contracts, according to new documents filed in state district court" writes Kiah Collier of the Texas Tribune and T. Christian Miller of ProPublica. Hidalgo County officials allege that Garza's company, Valley Data, paid bribes to get lucrative government contracts but then failed to do any work outside of being "a kickback vehicle and money laundering machine.”

There is absolutely no reason to believe that accountability and oversight will improve in the Trump era, if he does in fact get his wall funding. On the contrary, there's every reason to be worried that putting money aside for this massive boondoggle, even if it gets zeroed out before the first shovel hits the ground, will offer Trump and his cronies a massive opportunity to enrich themselves on the government dime."

Trump really needs the money, and construction graft is something he knows very well so it's not a surprise he's pushing so hard for such a large constructionproject to be funded. Ditto for his infrastructure "plan."

They want to ban all abortions to protect the unborn but when they go to school, they get gunned down by some mentally deranged lunatic that is allowed to buy many military grade semiautomatic assault guns and countless rounds of ammunition because he is protected by the complicit NRA & GOP and his 2nd Ammendment Rights.

Trump really needs the money, and construction graft is something he knows very well so it's not a surprise he's pushing so hard for such a large constructionproject to be funded. Ditto for his infrastructure "plan."

Donald Trump quietly paid $1.4 million in 1998 to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleged he stiffed a union pension fund by employing undocumented Polish laborers to demolish a department store to make way for Trump Tower.

The amount became public this week after a judge released previously sealed settlement documents in response to a motion filed by Time Inc. and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in 2016.

“This Order shall remain confidential in accordance with the parties’ agreement at the October 26, 1998 settlement conference,” reads the settlement agreement, which was signed on Dec. 30, 1998, by District Court Judge Thomas P. Griesa of New York’s Southern District.

The case originated in the summer of 1980, when Trump was under pressure to finish the demolition of the Bonwit Teller building on Fifth Avenue in New York City so that he could begin construction on his signature project, the Trump Tower.

As noted in an Aug. 25, 2016, story in TIME, Trump hired a group of undocumented Polish laborers who put in “12-hour shifts with inadequate safety equipment at subpar wages that their contractor paid sporadically, if at all.”

Their hiring led to years-long litigation that Trump finally settled in 1998.

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

It's a shame that they feel this is the proper way to tackle the problem; ripping a father who has broken no laws away from his family. the relaxation of the rules under Obama makes a lot more sense than the new rules under Trump.

They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

Earlier today, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit stated that the ban’s purpose has always been and remains to “exclude Muslims from the United States.” The ruling comes at a crucial time, because the Supreme Court will issue its own decision on the ban this summer.

Today’s decision confirms what has been clear since Trump first took office. Throughout his presidential campaign, he consistently promised to block Muslim immigration and even announced a specific plan for achieving that goal: a nationality-based travel ban against people from predominantly Muslim countries.

Trump wanted a temporary, conditional, and "total and complete" ban on Muslims entering the United States. I think it was for 90 days to allow his new administration to have time "to figure out what the hell is going on" and come up with a policy for a final solution to the Muslim problem.

Trump has had 13 months and what policy has he figured out other than rewriting his temporary Muslim ban time and again that the Courts wisely shut down?

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

Supreme Court Won't Review DACA Case
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a key case dealing with the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, saying the case has to wind its way through the appeals process first.https://www.npr.org/2018/02/26/58881...a-case-for-now

The U.S. Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a setback over the DACA program, which shields hundreds of thousands of young immigrants from deportation.

The court declined to take up a key case dealing with the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — for now.

The high court said an appeals court should hear the case first. The result is DACA will stay in place until when or if the Supreme Court takes it up.

The Trump administration tried to skip the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California and go directly to the Supreme Court. (The 9th Circuit is famously liberal-leaning.)

Two lower courts blocked the government from ending the DACA program. Trump had wanted to start ending the DACA protections in March for people brought to the U.S. as children and living in the country illegally.

The Supreme Court did not rule on the merits or even indicate which way it would lean on the DACA program. This was all about the legal process.

The ruling means continued uncertainty for a program set to expire one week from now. When Trump rescinded Obama's DACA executive order, he gave it an expiration date of six months.

Sorry Mr. President, Justice and the Rule of Law trumps you!

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump has privately floated the idea of funding construction of a border wall with Mexico through the US military budget in conversations with advisers, two sources confirmed to CNN Tuesday.

Trump discussed the idea in a private meeting last week with House Speaker Paul Ryan, a source familiar with the conversations said, as he reviewed the omnibus spending bill, which does not include funding for construction of a border wall. It was not immediately clear how serious Trump was about pursuing this option, but the move would likely face steep hurdles with appropriators in Congress.

He could if he declared the border situation to be a national emergency. Of course, there's more people crossing the border heading south than north now but he doesn't care about that. He could try. He'd get sued. He'd have to prove it's an emergency in court. He'd lose. But, legally, on the off chance that he won, he could do it that way.

The images that President Trump included in a tweet about being briefed on the start of his signature wall were actually of cranes replacing a barrier fence along the Mexican border, according to reports.

“Great briefing this afternoon on the start of our Southern Border WALL!” the president tweeted Wednesday along with four photos apparently from the scene of a small barrier replacement project in Calexico, California.

The images were from a months-long project — plans for which began in 2009 — to replace a 2.25-mile stretch of barrier along the Mexican border, the LA Times reported, citing a recent statement from US Customs and Border Protection.

Border Patrol agents emphasized that it should not be confused with Trump’s long-promised 2,000-mile wall that he said Mexico would pay for. “First and foremost, this isn’t Trump’s wall,” Jonathan Pacheco, a spokesman for the Border Patrol’s El Centro Sector, told a group on a border tour in early March, the paper reported. “This isn’t the infrastructure that Trump is trying to bring in … This new wall replacement has absolutely nothing to do with the prototypes that were shown over in the San Diego area,” he added. The original fence in Calexico, built in the 1990s, had been constructed from recycled metal scraps and old landing mat, according to the CBP. It is being replaced with a 30-foot-high, bollard-style wall.

“Although the existing wall has proven effective at deterring unlawful cross-border activity, smuggling organizations damaged and breached this outdated version of a border wall several hundred times during the last two years,” the agency said.

Justin Castrejon, a spokesman for the Border Patrol’s El Centro Sector, told the LA Times that “it was ultimately funded under the current administration in 2017, but is completely separate of any political talk or commentary.” But despite the agency’s statements, when asked by the LA Times on Wednesday whether the project and Trump’s wall were one and the same, a spokesman sent a one-word response: “Yes.”

Trump has complained to associates that he felt jilted when lawmakers included only $1.6 billion for his wall in the omnibus spending bill he signed last week, the Washington Post reported.

Frustrated that neither Mexico nor Congress will foot the more than $20 billion bill for the wall, Trump said he wanted the US armed forces to pick up the tab by framing it as a national security issue that falls under the Pentagon’s purview.

Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

The decision means plaintiffs can move forward with the suit which claims the president’s plan ran afoul of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment which prohibits government officials from discriminating on the basis of race.

Blames Obama for GW Bush's policies that had unanimous Republican support

SAN DIEGO — In vowing Tuesday to use the military on the U.S.-Mexico border until his coveted wall is built, President Donald Trump heaped blame on his predecessor, congressional Democrats and Mexico for creating a dangerous and dysfunctional border.

Here’s a look at some of Trump’s latest claims on the state of the border, including a caravan of Central Americans crossing Mexico, and how they stack up with the facts:

TRUMP: “President Obama made changes that basically created no border. It’s called catch and release. And we can’t do anything about it because the laws that were created by Democrats are so pathetic and so weak.”

THE FACTS: Wrong on several fronts.

In decrying what it calls “catch-and-release” policies, the White House cites a 2008 law that gave new protections to children who cross the border alone from countries other than Mexico or Canada. But the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act passed both houses of Congress unanimously with Republican President George W. Bush’s enthusiastic support.

Every country has the right to secure it's borders. If this caravan was heading towards Canada you can be sure there would be a LOT of noise about this. Let's remember it's probably more difficult to get into Canada than the US, our skills policy prevents a lot of illiterate and in-educated people from just streaming into this country.

How do you know that these people are uneducated? Could they not be fleeing violence or poverty? As far as getting into Canada, the US border is pretty much wide open. You can just walk across it at most points away from the official crossings. If you were in Stanstead, Que you could cross the border just by crossing the street.

What prevent people from just streaming into our country is the fact that we only share a land border with one country.

And these people aren't looking to stream across the border. Most of them are going to apply for refugee status. The rest are merely protesting. And it's not Mexico's job to police the US border for them.

How do you know that these people are uneducated? Could they not be fleeing violence or poverty? As far as getting into Canada, the US border is pretty much wide open. You can just walk across it at most points away from the official crossings. If you were in Stanstead, Que you could cross the border just by crossing the street.

What prevent people from just streaming into our country is the fact that we only share a land border with one country.

And these people aren't looking to stream across the border. Most of them are going to apply for refugee status. The rest are merely protesting. And it's not Mexico's job to police the US border for them.

If they are fleeing Guatemala they could go south towards Honduras or El Salvador, or to Mexico and apply for refugee status there, why are they country 'shopping' by going to the US. It almost seems like the Western countries are being shamed/ intimidated by some quarters for enforcing their own rules... go figure !
If Mexico does not enforce it's borders then the US has no choice but to step up protection of their borders.
What's to prevent people from 'choosing' Canada, once illegally in the US there is virtually nothing to stop them going north to Canada - just like what we saw last summer.

I especially like the quote " Most of them are going to apply for refugee status. The rest are merely protesting".. Yeah, right. Granted some will apply for refugee status, and will no doubt promise to turn up for their hearing to hear their fate - I'm just going out on a limb here, they simply will vanish into the country and will forever remain illegal. They rest will simply cross, take their chance, get caught, and will be in the next caravan.. Wash, lather, rinse ,repeat.

Trump says that border crossings are at a 46 year low. Spokesperson says that they're up from the 40 year low last April. Hmmmm, so they've been going up since he took office?

Trump wants it both ways on border crossings

"The Caravan is largely broken up thanks to the strong immigration laws of Mexico and their willingness to use them so as not to cause a giant scene at our Border. Because of the Trump Administrations actions, Border crossings are at a still UNACCEPTABLE 46 year low. Stop drugs!"

---

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen even called it the "Trump effect" when she briefed reporters at the White House Wednesday -- pointing out that his policies had led to a decrease in crossings during his first year in office.

But then she said that despite the many actions the administration has taken to discourage them and to end programs, "we've recently seen the numbers of illegal border crossings rise from 40-year lows last April, back to previous levels."

That's the opposite of what Trump said Thursday -- that crossings were at a 46-year low.

I especially like the quote " Most of them are going to apply for refugee status. The rest are merely protesting".. Yeah, right. Granted some will apply for refugee status, and will no doubt promise to turn up for their hearing to hear their fate - I'm just going out on a limb here, they simply will vanish into the country and will forever remain illegal. They rest will simply cross, take their chance, get caught, and will be in the next caravan.. Wash, lather, rinse ,repeat.

A little knowledge on the march, or "caravan"

The single biggest thing Donald Trump doesn't get about the caravan

Cillizza: Trump seems to be taking some credit -- along with the Mexican government -- for the dispersion of the caravan? Is that accurate?

Santiago: No. The caravan is one of many annual marches called Via Crucis in Mexico. These pilgrimages have become so symbolic, that many use that to take a stand on issues like immigration. They typically start off with a lot of people, and participants drop off at different points along the route.This particular Via Cruz, organized by Pueblo Sin Fronteras (The People Without Borders), is now in its eighth year of the annual caravan and is made up of mostly Central Americans.

The organizers have said all along they would travel north in unity to Mexico City, and SOME will try to make it to the US/Mexico border to seek asylum. Last year, organizers tell me about 150 people made it to the border. This year, they project about 200 will get to the US/Mexico border. So yes, the caravan is diminishing in numbers and the group will disperse. But that happens every year. It's not a Trump effect.

I especially like the quote " Most of them are going to apply for refugee status. The rest are merely protesting".. Yeah, right. Granted some will apply for refugee status, and will no doubt promise to turn up for their hearing to hear their fate - I'm just going out on a limb here, they simply will vanish into the country and will forever remain illegal. They rest will simply cross, take their chance, get caught, and will be in the next caravan.. Wash, lather, rinse ,repeat.

A little knowledge on the march, or "caravan"

The single biggest thing Donald Trump doesn't get about the caravan

Cillizza: Trump seems to be taking some credit -- along with the Mexican government -- for the dispersion of the caravan? Is that accurate?

Santiago: No. The caravan is one of many annual marches called Via Crucis in Mexico. These pilgrimages have become so symbolic, that many use that to take a stand on issues like immigration. They typically start off with a lot of people, and participants drop off at different points along the route.This particular Via Cruz, organized by Pueblo Sin Fronteras (The People Without Borders), is now in its eighth year of the annual caravan and is made up of mostly Central Americans.

The organizers have said all along they would travel north in unity to Mexico City, and SOME will try to make it to the US/Mexico border to seek asylum. Last year, organizers tell me about 150 people made it to the border. This year, they project about 200 will get to the US/Mexico border. So yes, the caravan is diminishing in numbers and the group will disperse. But that happens every year. It's not a Trump effect.

The only purpose the "scare-a-van" serves is to rile up Trump's base and perhaps create some additional fear or hysteria in the US, as if enough does not already exist. It conjures up images of millions of people streaming towards the US border, which is stupid because it is hundreds, not millions and of course the US Mexico border is already fairly well defended or secured. What was, at one time years ago, a stream of people successfully crossing seems to have diminished considerably to a trickle in more recent years.

Of course, numbers, details or reality are not Trumps strong point. However, he doesn't care, because if he can whip up enough fear or hysteria, perhaps he can get his ridiculous border wall somehow. I expect he hopes the kickbacks from the construction of it to him will be HUGE !!!

Again, Mexico is not enforcing it's own southern border. Why are these asylum seekers not claiming refugee status in Mexico ? They are refugee shopping. How many of these will make it to Roxham Road and simply walk across the border.
Unbelievable that there are 'fleeing' the US. Why on earth does JT not declare that area a Point of Entry and prevent this is beyond me. Enough is enough.

And walking among them are the immigrants and children of immigrants from countries that not long ago were people of previously ‘murderous’ enemy states like the Germans, Italians, Japanese and Austrians, Hungarian, Bulgarians... (the WWs axis allies etc.)

16% so that means 84% were non Jewish (yet they singled out the Jewish people but didn’t provide any other breakdowns for the vast majority in this comment):

Immigration to the United States after 1945 - Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History

“Immediately after the war, the United States was pressured to deal with the over thirty million dislocated Europeans, including a million displaced persons (DPs) who had been forced from their homelands during the war. President Harry S. Truman issued a directive in 1946 to allocate half of the European quotas for refugee admissions. Enacted in 1948 and amended in 1950, the displaced persons acts authorized the admission of 202,000 individuals in two years. These measures were developed within the framework of the existing immigration law by allowing nations to mortgage their future quotas. The DP acts eventually admitted four hundred thousand Europeans; 16 percent of them were Jewish.11 From 1949 to 1952, almost half of the new immigrants were admitted as refugees; most of them had no connections with American citizens. In the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act, refugee policies were incorporated into immigration regulation. Because many of the newcomers had no connections in the United States, assistance was provided through voluntary social service networks (VOLAGS). As this practice continued, the VOLAGS and the religious and ethnic groups involved in them also began to influence American immigration policy.12 “

They are, if they're crossing not at an official border crossings. And they're coming from a safe country.
Sound like mostly economic migrants. Nothing wrong with economic migrants but that's not the same thing.

Yup, it seems to me that many people who feel passionately about immigration, whether on one side or the other, don't often differentiate between true refugees and economic migrants. They're not the same thing, and shouldn't be lumped in together.

Yup, it seems to me that many people who feel passionately about immigration, whether on one side or the other, don't often differentiate between true refugees and economic migrants. They're not the same thing, and shouldn't be lumped in together.

Exactly. These refugees have crossed several countries and are making a choice to go to the US. Just like those refugees who fly to New York, get a bus/ taxi to Roxhman Road and drag their suitcases into Canada.Lets not forget, US and Canada do help settle refugees who are being persecuted in their home countries. Plus, both countries send vast amount of aid. It's a matter of economics, we cannot simply let everybody in to the country - it's a matter of economics.In fact, in one of those pics "Asylum is a right" was written on a flag. Excuse me, no it's not a right. Is that where this is all heading ?? Open borders and a free for all ???Regarding economic refugees, the US and Canada are perfectly within their rights to accept pick and choose who enters the country based on skills etc. Re post #1276 ( almost typed 1776), yes, if the Natives were organized and had a concept of a nation state, were organized, had an army, had guns and weapons they could have very well fought and repelled the 'newcomers' and we'd not be having this conversation. However, that is not the way it turned out by way of bloodshed, so here we are. One of the most important factors that helped the first world become wealthy is the rule of law.

They are, if they're crossing not at an official border crossings. And they're coming from a safe country.
Sound like mostly economic migrants. Nothing wrong with economic migrants but that's not the same thing.

Well, according to the Fox news article posted earlier, it sounds like they are crossing at an official border crossing, and fear they'll be persecuted if they stay in their origin countries:

U.S. immigration officials said Sunday that the San Diego border crossing where hundreds of Central American immigrants intended to apply for asylum was closed due to high capacity -- but many of the asylum-seekers were preparing to wait overnight.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) said earlier Sunday that the agency "reached capacity at the San Ysidro port of entry for CBP officers to be able to bring additional persons traveling without appropriate entry documentation into the port of entry for processing."

Commissioner Kevin McAleenan told Fox News in a statement that immigrants "may need to wait in Mexico as CBP officers work to process those already within our facilities."

Roughly 200 people, including women and young children, were expected to turn themselves over to border inspectors after arriving in Tijuana last week, claiming they had a credible fear of persecution at home. Demonstrators gathered along the border to hold a rally in the hours before crossing over, with some people scaling the fence.

"The only thing I would tell Mr. Trump is to have a conscious and to look at all the people and the way they suffer. Because the people, they are coming from those countries, they are not doing it for pleasure," Osman Salvador Ulla Castro, who is from Honduras, told Fox News. "They face danger and extortions and they are looking for a better life."

The Border Patrol said Saturday that several groups of families from the caravan earlier tried to enter the U.S. illegally by scaling parts of the "dilapidated scrap metal border fence" near San Ysidro.

So, a few of them are trying to sneak in, but it sounds as though the majority are trying to do it properly. Obviously the people doing it illegally should be rejected immediately.

They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

People need to understand that those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.

Agree. And Canada doesn’t have the same numbers of people illegally entering the country. Attitudes here would be very different if we couldn’t control immigration.

That said, there’s thousands of people ignoring their laws and profiting off the cheap labour. What are the penalties down there for doing so and could they be stiffened and better enforced. That was the approach to illegal drugs. Bigger and bigger jails.

Not even jail!

The just get a fine that amounts to pocket change compared to the savings:

DOJ increasing penalty for hiring illegal immigrants | Fox News

“Under the interim final rule published Thursday in the Federal Register, the minimum penalty imposed by the DOJ for the unlawful employment of immigrants would rise from $375 to $539, while the maximum fine would go from $3,200 to $4,313.

The changes stemmed from amendments in a 2015 budget bill that overhauled the formula for increasing such civil penalties.

Violators facing multiple charges also would be subject to a new maximum penalty of $21,563 for hiring illegal immigrants.”